Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Brinqa vs Tenable Security Center comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Brinqa
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
39th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (15th)
Tenable Security Center
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
RB
Allows us to configure the risk algorithm to suit our specific needs
I would give the easiness of the initial setup a seven out of ten. It can be a bit complex. Some connections are straightforward, but some take a long time. Deploying Brinqa took time, as it was done in phases. Initially, it took about six months before we started getting valuable data from it. Then, it expanded from there. The deployment began with a product demo and contract negotiation. We connected some data sources to Brinqa's cloud service, which was straightforward. We used the default risk ranking algorithm but faced issues with the dashboards, so we customized them to fit our organization's needs over a few years. We depended a lot on Brinqa for the deployment. We had some internal resources, but they lacked the needed skills, so it took time to train our two-man team. Initially, it required one person for maintenance, and they spent most of their time on it.
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic and periodic management of security scans, along with the ability to consolidate all information into a single dashboard."
"Feature-wise, Tenable Security Center is a very fast tool with many dashboards and reports, and it covers all our systems."
"The customer service and support team at Tenable were extremely helpful."
"I find Tenable SC to be a very scalable product."
"The predictive prioritization features are pretty good. They do a lot of research and we trust the research that they do internally. They have knowledge of what's going on with many companies, where we only get a view into what's going on here. So the ability to get best practices out of them as part of this solution, is valuable to us."
"The solution has a lean and easy-to-use interface that is not confusing to first-time users."
"Initial setup was pretty straightforward."
"I found the dashboard features very useful. It made it easy to track remediation progress. I could publish dashboards to remediation teams and track the progress on the dashboards."
 

Cons

"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision."
"Current web page needs improvement, slows down processes."
"The reports and plugins for reports and scans could benefit from enhancements."
"There is not much room for improvement. However, there should be a guide that describes the step-by-step procedures for doing tasks. Otherwise, training is required from a senior guy to a junior guy."
"Deploying Tenable.sc is highly complex because it's an on-prem solution, whereas Tenable.io is cloud-based, so you can go live as soon as you log in. Tenable.sc involves significant integration with other on-prem solutions, and the deployment takes about two to three weeks with the help of a system integrator"
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
"Additional costs are associated with using the solution, as additional scanners are required for different endpoints connected to the Tenable Security Center. If Tenable Security Center could extract information from these scanners automatically rather than manually, it would enhance user-friendliness for customers."
"The web application is not very functional."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."
"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
"It is a bit expensive. Everything is included in the license."
"Though reasonable, the main competitor of Tenable SC, Rapid7, offers a more aggressive and better priced product."
"The tool costs around 15,000 Saudi riyals monthly."
"The pricing depends upon the number of IPs."
"Tenable SC is priced per asset, with the basic solution starting around US$12,000 for 500 assets."
"We're able to save because we don't have to employ more staff members to help wit ht he scheduling of the scans, running the reports or sending them out to the systems owners. That alone is a big ROI for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Retailer
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Educational Organization
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
While Zafran Security is already a powerful tool, there are areas where it could be further improved to provide even ...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Our primary use case for Zafran involves leveraging it to enhance our vulnerability risk scoring methodology. In toda...
What do you like most about Brinqa?
The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Brinqa?
I would rate the costliness of the solution at a seven out of ten. It is on the expensive side and there are some add...
What needs improvement with Brinqa?
Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision. We felt they were somewhat slow i...
What do you like most about Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pric...
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into Europea...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: March 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.